• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

And_Gignac

Member
pigeon said:
I mean, sure, Nate has been wrong in the past, but this article seems like pretty reasonable to me? Sanders overperforms in caucuses and where there are too many white people, and there aren't that many such states left.
Click to expand...

I just dislike Nate. He triggers me.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Mark Harris ‏@MarkHarrisNYC 24m24 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
@Skepacabra A) it's untrue B) It minimizes minority populations C) If you want a revolution, don't start by saying some people don't count.

Mark Harris ‏@MarkHarrisNYC 55m55 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
You guys get that the "Clinton only wins in red states" argument is both meaningless and borderline racist, right? Good.

Mark Harris ‏@MarkHarrisNYC 22h22 hours ago Manhattan, NY
Primary wins: Clinton 16, Sanders 4
Caucus wins: Sanders 9, Clinton 2
Primaries left: 17
Caucuses left: 2
Click to expand...

.
 
B

bananas

Banned
Cybit said:
Answer is: All except the white lesbian (who is married to the black lesbian) are all active duty military.

Clinton is (rightfully) despised by most folks who are in active service for what Bill did (and Hillary supported) during his administration to active duty military. I suspect a high number of minority Trump supporters are active duty or were active duty military.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that generally is what I see as well. If it's any conciliation, I'm an active duty military personnel who supports Hillary.
 
C

Crocodile

Member
The general cowardice of the GOP establishment to disavow Trump, Cruz, etc. just shows how morally bankrupt the GOP establishment is. Who cares if your leading candidates are putting forth TERRIBLE policies, power above all right? Sigh :(

Plinko said:
I think the debates really helped him.
Click to expand...

I like how this thread keeps going back and forth on whether or not "thing X" hurts or helps Trump. I know you personally have flipped back and forth on particular subjects. I don't blame you though, this is some tricky shit.

But yeah, Trump is weirdly quiet. I know its Easter but still. I don't think it behooves him to sit still since its likely everyone in the Wisconsin establishment is doing everything in their power to "rig" (not literally but figuratively) this for Cruz.

Valhelm said:
Huh. Mind elaborating?

Half of the Trump supporters I've met in Miami have been younger Haitian or Anglo-Caribbean immigrants who thought undocumented people have too easy of a deal. Each of these four people insisted, though, that they cared most about Trump's amorphous jobs plan.

The one white male Trump supporter I've met was a well-off young gay lawyer who wanted to fuck over the GOP out of spite, due to a local law being signed by Rubio in his days in the senate that fucked over his property ownership. I asked him if Trump's racism bothered him, but he swore that was just a media exaggeration. He was at the precinct campaigning with a Nicaraguan-born woman who mostly liked Trump because she fears a Sanders presidency and thinks only Trump could stop him.

South Florida is a weird area.
Click to expand...

My brothers and sisters in blood are letting me down :(

pigeon said:
I mean, sure, Nate has been wrong in the past, but this article seems like pretty reasonable to me? Sanders overperforms in caucuses and where there are too many white people, and there aren't that many such states left.
Click to expand...

Melkr_ said:
I just dislike Nate. He triggers me.
Click to expand...

FYI, Nate didn't write that recent article, Harry Enten did :p
 
K

Kangi

Member
NeoXChaos said:
.
Click to expand...

Mark Harris ‏@MarkHarrisNYC 26m26 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
If you buy this argument, only purple states "matter." So: 4 closest races in '12 were Fla., NC, Ohio, & Va. Who's won all four this year?
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
H

Hilbert

Deep into his 30th decade
Participating in a caucus gives you a traumatic case of "man, I should have said THAT!".


(is there a term for this?)
 
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
OrangeGrayBlue said:
Especially crazy considering that something like 30% of democrats are black.
Click to expand...

Uh, I hate to break this to you, but there's probably a reasonable (25-30) percentage of black voters who would be in one of the first three categories. But you'd have to do an actual breakdown to be sure.

I suspect older blacks / those who grew up in extremely rough areas (ala Compton in the 90s) might be liable to cast their vote in the first three categories. Folks who grew up in the height of the gang issues / increase in violent crime / etc also might fall into those categories.

Eyeballing those categories, its 45% in the first three categories vs 55% in the last two categories.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
So the liberal consensus on what the GOP voter base looks like is:

White Nationalists: 40%
Super religious white people (Mormons and church going evangelicals): 35%
Establishment (people that don't really care about the bigotry positively but want a tax cut): 25%

... It's still crazy how fast Scott Walker's negative charisma and honest stupidity sunk him because, on paper, he looks like he should unite all three of these groups.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Crocodile said:
I like how this thread keeps going back and forth on whether or not "thing X" hurts or helps Trump. I know you personally have flipped back and forth on particular subjects. I don't blame you though, this is some tricky shit.

But yeah, Trump is weirdly quiet. I know its Easter but still. I don't think it behooves him to sit still since its likely everyone in the Wisconsin establishment is doing everything in their power to "rig" (not literally but figuratively) this for Cruz.
Click to expand...

I like to analyze things, and this cycle Trump has been a struggle for me. How can he not? I don't think anyone knows what will happen next.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
So I think something that struck me in reading threads about the Tax Policy Center analyses and the calculator based on it. (Setting aside whether one agrees with how they've gone about distributing things like changes to payroll tax.)

The general mentality seems to be that people are for services but have no intent to actually pay for them. In this regard everybody essentially is looking at their own situation in isolation.

Subsequent arguments against the individual outcomes people state would affect them center around it not capturing benefits to that individual that could be gained in wages or savings in there being no individual outlays for private healthcare. They fight back against the idea that people may ultimately be worse off financially.

But no one seems to want to admit that the "middle class" may have to actually contribute to any sort of universal healthcare and be personally worse off for it. No one seems to actually feel they should even contribute at all. That the point of such a system isn't just for one's own benefit but to ensure everyone has access if necessary.

And that mentality - not corporations and millionaires and billionaires and Wall St - is why I don't expect there to be any sort of universal coverage in the US any time soon.
Click to expand...

A few people I've talked to just don't like the assurances that the services will actually happen, and they're unwilling to risk the tax increase without better guarantees on the services. A legitimate one in Sanders' case would be single payer health care. People want more assurances that it wouldn't turn out like the VA before raising their taxes. Like, if I said I was going to shoot you in the chest, but I'd make sure you had a Kevlar vest on first, you'd naturally want that to be double and triple checked before you even let me raise the barrel.

NeoXChaos said:
.
Click to expand...

Kangi said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...

Nailed it. As a MS resident, it really peeves me to hear about how my vote shouldn't count because the state votes red in general. That shit didn't get thrown around when OK voted for Bernie.
 
S

Sianos

Member
pigeon said:
Pretty sure Rubio is one of them.
Click to expand...

If he isn't one of them, he's definitely in possession of one.

Senator Rubio:

When you became Florida’s Speaker of the House, one of the other men on stage here tonight, Jeb Bush, presented you with a golden sword, which he said was the “Sword of Chang”. He told you that “Chang is somebody who believes in conservative principles, believes in entrepreneurial capitalism, believes in moral values that underpin a free society. Chang, this mystical warrior, has never let me down.” You looked pretty excited about it.

Now, some might say that this all came from a giant misunderstanding. Back in the late 1940s, Mao Zedong’s victorious Chinese communists forced Chiang Kai-shek’s defeated Chinese nationalists to retreat to the island of Taiwan. The United States kept the peace in the the Taiwan Strait, mostly to prevent Mao from invading and finishing the job, but a common refrain in 1950s conservativism went that we should “unleash Chiang”; that is, advise Chiang Kai-Shek to go back across the strait and reconquer China. George H. W. Bush served as envoy to China, had to listen to this sort of stuff, and got annoyed enough at the “unleash Chiang” rhetoric that he would quote it ironically at bizarre times, like his documented habit of threatening that his serve would “unleash Chiang” on his tennis opponents. It’s unclear how we got from George H. W. Bush’s constant threats to “unleash Chiang” on people, to his son’s belief that Chang was a mystical conservative warrior. Maybe it was a joke, either Bush Sr. pranking Jeb or Jeb pranking you.

In any case, you hung the sword in “a place of honor in your office”. From that point forward, Jeb’s fortunes declined. He left the Florida governorship, failed to get any further high positions, and then ran a very lackluster Presidential campaign. But from that same point your own fortunes decidedly rose. You started a law firm, were appointed a professor, got elected to the Senate, and are currently running a spectacular Presidential campaign with most pundits betting on your eventual victory after Trump and Carson lose their shine. The connection between the transfer of the sword and the sudden switch in both your fortunes is so striking that even the Huffington Post, not normally a source for magic-sword-related journalism, wrote about it: Jeb’s Last Hope – Reclaim the Sword of Chang.

But here we have a conundrum: if there was never a mythical Chinese warrior named Chang, by what magic does this sword grant worldly success to its possessor and ignomious ruin to any who lose it? There is a legend that fits almost exactly: the tale of the Holy Lance, aka the Spear of Destiny, aka several other portentious sounding names. According to the story, this relic from Christ’s crucifixion grants victory to all who own it and swift ruin to all who lose it. Charlemagne was reputedly the first to make use of its power; he was unstoppable while he wielded it but died moments after dropping it during battle. The same pattern repeated with Frederick Barbarossa, then a host of other military leaders, until finally it passed to the Austrian Habsburgs. They realized its power, locked it away, and ended up winning the greatest empire in European history. Supposedly Hitler was obsessed with it, so much so that his fascination with the object inspired the depiction of Nazi archaeologists in Raiders of the Lost Ark, and he took it for himself after the Anschluss. As the war wound down, the relic caught the special attention of General George Patton, who brought it back safely to Vienna afterwards. But ever since that time there have been various rumors that it was a fake, and that Nazi sympathizers took the real Lance in preparation for the time when the Reich would rise again.

The book Secrets of the Holy Lance describes one possible route by which the artifact might have been smuggled out of Europe:
Reporters John Buchanan and Stacey Michael cite recently declassified documents from the US National Archives that indicate that Prescott Bush “failed to divest himself of more than a dozen enemy national relationships that continued until as late as 1951. Bush conducted business following the end of World War II with moving assets into the Nazi refuges of Argentina, Panama, and Brazil.
So Prescott Bush was involved in moving Nazi “assets” from conquered Europe to South American refuges, presumably including the true Lance. Far be it from me to impugn his business ethics, but I don’t remember Nazi refugees in Argentina becoming an unstoppable force aided by a weapon of legendary mystical power. On the other hand, I do remember Prescott Bush being elected to the United States Senate just a few years later. Then his son and the presumed heir of his property was elected US President. Then his son was also elected US President. I need not add that according to the the laws of genetics, the chance of this happening by coincidence is hundreds-of-thousands to one even assuming implausibly high heritability of the fitness-to-be-president trait. Then his other son starts rocketing up through the ranks right up until the moment he gave you the sword of Chang, a sword named after a weird Bush family in-joke about a Chinese mystical warrior who doesn’t exist.

I think we can start to sketch out a plausible explanation here. Hitler didn’t want the Holy Lance falling into the hands of his enemies, so he replaced it with a fake and hired Nazi-artifact-smuggler Prescott Bush to transport the real one to safety in South America. Bush realized what he had, handed the South Americans a second fake, and kept the real one for himself, reforging it from a lance into a sword to cover his tracks – an action entirely in character for Prescott Bush, whose other relic-stealing adventures include the theft of Geronimo’s skull. He died unexpectedly without getting the chance to explain the significance of the artifact to his son George H. W. Bush. But since it seemed like a sentimentally important heirloom, George took care of his father’s weird golden sword anyway. When his sons asked him about it he didn’t have a real answer, so he just made his favorite in-joke about “unleashing Chiang”, and they believed him. Then eventually it passed to George W, later on to Jeb, and then Jeb thought it would be a funny present to give you to honor your election as Florida speaker.

Obviously the Lance is a significant strategic asset for America, and I imagine if you were President then its aura of victory would apply to the country as well, much as the Habsburgs’ possession of the lance enlarged Austria-Hungary. However, its powers are generally held to come from the Antichrist.

So my question for you is, do you think it’s ethical to use your magic sword to channel the power of the Antichrist if that would ensure America’s military success?

source: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/11/16/hardball-questions-for-the-next-debate
Click to expand...

Any theories on where the others could be? Inside of an alligator? Underneath a Publix?
 
B

besada

Banned
sphagnum said:
He also played a rabbi in a movie in the 90s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWl6TLvlFEk
Click to expand...
I knew that, but I'd never heard of the album. Those spoken word political albums of the era are gold.

Speaking of old politics:
http://youtu.be/Ue407RWDgl8
Jimmy Carter's 1976 Presidential Campaign song, 1976, featuring time-traveling Michael Cera at 1:09.

During the primary he had a hilarious campaign 45 single called "The Peanut Shuffle" playing of the disco craze, but I can't find a copy anywhere.
 
JetBlackPanda

JetBlackPanda

Member
so what is with that VOX thing for tax plans? is Bernies plan really like that? how can he raise taxes on the lower and middle class by so much while he talks about what he does all the time?
 
V

Voysa Reezun

Banned
I was at a Bellevue school for my caucus. It was actually pretty cool, though Bernie won the count there. There were actually a decent amount of Hill-dawg supporters. I came in undecided, but quickly went to the Clinton supporters (I just didn't want to claim Clinton immediately because I didn't want to be like, yeah, I'm gonna stand over here and argue passionately for Clinton).

I actually had a good talk with a couple of middle-aged white ladies. They were curious why I supported Clinton, so I explained most of the stuff that people say around here (cautious about trying to go for too much change at once, like most of the Obama agenda, generally think that free trade deals are good for both Americans and whoever else we're dealing with, worries about devaluing college degrees if only college is free, etc.). They seemed pretty empathetic to my points, though I don't think that I sold them on trade.

Then we started talking about the SCOTUS deal and then that led to talking about our favorite justices historically, so I got to go on for awhile about Hugo Black and the Notorious R.B.G., so it was pretty fun (it took awhile to get to the official count).

I think that many Bernie supporters are belligerent on the internet in a way that they wouldn't be in real life. And yeah, some of them harbor very bigoted views, but every time I meet Bernie supporters in real life, I always have very pleasant conversations with them.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
JetBlackPanda said:
so what is with that VOX thing for tax plans? is Bernies plan really like that? how can he raise taxes on the lower and middle class by so much while he talks about what he does all the time?
Click to expand...

It's pretty much how social democracies work. Most European countries have a VAT or aggressive sales tax which generally is pretty regressive and affects the lower and middle classes a lot. They have to, because most people are poor or middle class, and you need to tax a lot in order to pay for things like single payer healthcare.

The theory is that the services you get are cheaper than the amount you pay in taxes, because the government can use economies of scale and negotiation by fiat to keep prices down. It seems to work in general! But in America it's a little bit scary for most people.

As I posted in that thread and in this thread, I think that calculator is basically a scaremonger rather than a useful way to understand Sanders's proposals. If he passes single-payer (unlikely) then you can't think about the tax without thinking about the benefits. If he doesn't pass single-payer then he won't increase the taxes! So thinking about the taxes in a vacuum is not a productive model to consider.
 
R

royalan

Member
This Race for the White House series on CNN has been damn good so far.

GODDAMMIT Dukakis. Losing with dignity (but still losing) like a true Dem...:(


Can't wait until CNN can do a docu-series on the Republican primaries this year. They have a full season's worth of content to work with.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
pigeon said:
It's pretty much how social democracies work. Most European countries have a VAT or aggressive sales tax which generally is pretty regressive and affects the lower and middle classes a lot. They have to, because most people are poor or middle class, and you need to tax a lot in order to pay for things like single payer healthcare.

The theory is that the services you get are cheaper than the amount you pay in taxes, because the government can use economies of scale and negotiation by fiat to keep prices down. It seems to work in general! But in America it's a little bit scary for most people.

As I posted in that thread and in this thread, I think that calculator is basically a scaremonger rather than a useful way to understand Sanders's proposals. If he passes single-payer (unlikely) then you can't think about the tax without thinking about the benefits. If he doesn't pass single-payer then he won't increase the taxes! So thinking about the taxes in a vacuum is not a productive model to consider.
Click to expand...

It disconnects the services gained and lost from the equation, which is unfair.
The services lost under Trump or Cruz would be extensive.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
I knew caucuses were a form of suppression but dayum:

Hawaii Congressional and Gubernatorial Democratic Primary 2014: 237,917 votes

Hawaii Democratic Caucus 2016: 33,716 votes
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Macho Madness said:
I knew caucuses were a form of suppression but dayum:

Hawaii Congressional and Gubernatorial Democratic Primary 2014: 237,917 votes

Hawaii Democratic Caucus 2016: 33,716 votes
Click to expand...

Wait, what kind of votes are we talking about?
 
B

Basileus777

Member
What's with all of this Publix love?

Suikoguy said:
It disconnects the services gained and lost from the equation, which is unfair.
The services lost under Trump or Cruz would be extensive.
Click to expand...
Yep, that tax calculator is dangerously misleading. Yeah, a lower flat tax sounds nice if you ignore how it'd require dismantling government services and raising the price of goods and services as a result of Cruz's VAT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom